This is where you should enter proposals for new conferences.
 
The normal procedure is this:  People kick around your suggestion for a
while - say, a week or two.  If the cfadms see that there's a lot of
interest, they'll normally email you to discuss a few details.  If they
don't, you can email cfadm to say *you're* still interested, and the
conference will be set up.
 
Obviously, there are no guarantees that anyone will ever join or read
your conference.  If this matters to you, you may want to gauge others'
interest before starting.  (We've had a very few people grouse along
the lines of "What's wrong with this system, anyway?  I set up this
neat conference, but it's been completely dead!".  Other
conferences have just quietly expired, to nobody's apparent dismay.)
 
Ideally, you should propose a name for the conference, give some idea
what it's intended to discuss or accomplish, and propose a fairwitness
or fairwitnesses - preferably with the agreement of those you propose.

-albaugh, Coop9, Item 8.

13 responses total.

This seems overly cumbersome in this day and age.  We have so little usage
on Grex, that kicking around ideas for a few weeks isn't likely to generate
much, if any, discussion.  To the extent that it did, I'd imagine that much
of it, while probably well-intentioned, would ultimately be counter-productive
in the sense it would likely take the form of asking the requestors to justify
their requests, which, I think, is a waste of time.  At this point, if anyone
wants to use Grex, let's just let them use it how they like, without a lot
of vetting.

Very few people use any conference except agora. Is there a counter for the
use of all the present conferences? 

I reallydoubt it.

Dan, all I'm doing here is giving folks a place to request conferences.
 What happens next, we'll determine when someone asks for one. :)

That's fine, Joe.  But grex does tend to get wrapped around the axle when it
comes to following procedure.  I think that's going to hurt us going forward;
people need to get used to being more agile and accepting of things that
aren't the way that things have always been.

Given the low usage of conferences, we probably should create new ones
rather quickly if there is a little interest and someone willing to run
it.  The amount of disk space is rather trivial nowadays, so no big
issue there.  And seeing some new life in the conferences would be good.
If we create a new conference, be sure to announce it in agora so others
can see and maybe try it out.

resp:5 totally!
---
1. What is the command tsty runs to add new accounts? Is it done via 
sudo? On M-net, you had this command that a volunteer could manually run
 that would create an account.. I was thinking, to speed up account 
creation, would it be possible to allow ANY member to create said
account?

To *create* an account, or to *validate* an account?  The command to
validate an account is, IIRC, "validate."  It can only be run by members
of the 'porters' group, again IIRC.

oops! apologies - 'validate'. thank you.

  
re 7 ... cmmand is   validate .. i actualy use an alias for it.
  

The procedure outlined by Joe in resp:0 dates from an era when there
were lots of active conferences and folks were concerned about topic
overlap.  A reqest dialog might go like this -

    REQUESTER:  I'd like to have a conference where we talk about ABC.

    RANDOM RESPONDENT:  There's already an XYZ conference where they
    talk about that.  It's pretty active.

    REQUESTER:  Oh, ok, never mind then, I'll go to conference XYZ.

Nowadays it's difficult to imagine that dialog taking place.

I'd favor simplifying the process.

Now, does anybody want a new conference?

we still need to advertise and update the website to reflect all this..

Anybody can check out the web repository and start updating stuff.  Send
patches to staff.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss